Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-08-2015, 09:23 AM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,551
QuoteOriginally posted by ClinchShots Quote
I used an A7r a few times and the results were so much better in low light
Well, if you use a 1 stop faster lens on a K-3, you get the same as FF (simply because the K-3 sensor come out of the same production line as the A7 sensor from Sony, but the K-3 sensor is roughly half the size).
In reality, the bottelneck is at ISO100 , FF achieves more slick images at ISO100 and the K-3 can't catch-up because the ISO can't be lowered below 100.


Last edited by biz-engineer; 03-08-2015 at 09:34 AM.
03-08-2015, 09:49 AM - 1 Like   #32
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,877
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Well, if you use a 1 stop faster lens on a K-3, you get the same as FF (simply because the K-3 sensor come out of the same production line as the A7 sensor from Sony, but the K-3 sensor is roughly half the size).
In reality, the bottelneck is at ISO100 , FF achieves more slick images at ISO100 and the K-3 can't catch-up because the ISO can't be lowered below 100.
I think you might need to define "more slick". It's not a term I recognize.... my point being that once you reach a certain level of "slickness" no further "slickness" is noticeable. For me, with my K-5 and K-3 cameras set from 100-400 ISO and sometimes as high as 1600 no additional "sllckness" is needed, or can even be appreciated.

My observation has always been, backed up by many charts and images, there's not a lot of difference between FF and APS-c images taken from 100-400 ISO. SO, you're actually discussing something that's really only an issue past 1600 ISO. And then if you match DoF you can shoot at wider ƒstop with APS-c, one stop faster ISO and completely negate the FF advantage.
03-08-2015, 09:55 AM   #33
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,614
If you want to see the bottleneck check this out. Sony A7 at left and Pentax K-3 at right, both at ISO 6400. From Imaging Resources.

Last edited by JimmyDranox; 04-17-2017 at 10:26 PM.
03-08-2015, 10:03 AM   #34
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,877
Exactly what I was talking about, the K-3 image is unacceptable, but so is the Sony. For some of us un-acceptable is an absolute, there is no "more un-acceptable" and "less unacceptable". If I were you, I would have looked for the point where the Sony image was acceptable and the K-3 wasn't. Also you found images that don't show the K-3 DOF advantage. To normalize the DoF you should have compared a 6400 ISO A7 to a 3200 ISO K-3. The you'd have two images with the same DoF.

In images like this i's hard to get the whole bird in focus. Not taking into account the number of times maxing out your DoF is important to an image, is probably the biggest mistake FF proponents make. They talk about a noise advantage, that in this type of photography just doesn't exist.




Last edited by normhead; 03-08-2015 at 10:17 AM.
03-08-2015, 10:14 AM   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,551
A7 @ 6400 vs K3 @ 1600.
Attached Images
 
03-08-2015, 10:19 AM - 1 Like   #36
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,614
Yes. At different iSO sony at 6400, and Pentax k-3 at 3200, the difference in noise is not so big. But still, The FF semms to have a bbetter resolution that APS-C, even if they are both 24Mp.

Last edited by JimmyDranox; 04-17-2017 at 10:26 PM.
03-08-2015, 10:35 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,551
The slightly better resolution of the A7 remains.
03-08-2015, 10:46 AM - 1 Like   #38
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,614
That's the reason for which I hope that Pentax FF will go for Quality=low light performance, not Quantity=a lot of Mp with a lot of noise. If they can match the low light performance of Canon 6D, would be great (I'm not dreaming of A7S performance, is something different, at 12 Mp).

03-08-2015, 11:20 AM   #39
Pentaxian
chickentender's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,993
QuoteOriginally posted by FantasticMrFox Quote
If you've shot weddings in the past with the K3 and your customers were satisfied, then there is no objective reason why you can't continue to shoot weddings for another 1/2 to 3/4 year with the same equipment or rent a FF for a couple of occasions.

If you want to change systems for other reasons, by all means do it.
Yes. This. What exactly is the "problem" here?
I never understand most threads like this. Leave the system... Don't leave the system... It's a button-pushing topic but there's just better things to talk and worry about.
03-08-2015, 04:07 PM   #40
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,877
The parameters I defined were 100 to 400 ISO, so I'm not sure why you keep going on about the 6400 ISO thing. It's unacceptable both cameras, in most circumstances 1600 ISO is un-acceptable in a Pentax. Why do you guys keep trying to impress me with stuff, I've already told you is unacceptable? ou do understand that tho matter what system you use, buy 6400 ISO you've lost 4 stops of Dynamic range, on anything accept maybe a Sony A7s which has unacceptably low dynamic range to start with?
03-08-2015, 04:22 PM   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,457
There is one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet ?....how to put the fire out ?
Here is MY suggestion......send ME the $4000 and I will hold it for you. You will always be MY "Pentaxhero" if you do....lol
03-08-2015, 06:00 PM - 2 Likes   #42
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,369
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The parameters I defined were 100 to 400 ISO, so I'm not sure why you keep going on about the 6400 ISO thing. It's unacceptable both cameras, in most circumstances 1600 ISO is un-acceptable in a Pentax. Why do you guys keep trying to impress me with stuff, I've already told you is unacceptable? ou do understand that tho matter what system you use, buy 6400 ISO you've lost 4 stops of Dynamic range, on anything accept maybe a Sony A7s which has unacceptably low dynamic range to start with?
I would have no problems including a 6400iso from my A7 on an 8x10" print in a package for a client
03-08-2015, 06:10 PM - 1 Like   #43
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Well, if you use a 1 stop faster lens on a K-3, you get the same as FF (simply because the K-3 sensor come out of the same production line as the A7 sensor from Sony, but the K-3 sensor is roughly half the size).
In reality, the bottelneck is at ISO100 , FF achieves more slick images at ISO100 and the K-3 can't catch-up because the ISO can't be lowered below 100.
At same DOF, the 'bottleneck' is ISO as you mention. For example, D810 can do ISO47. All else the same, APS-C would have to do ISO 20 to match.

Of course the IQ on both at those low ISO's is pretty good.


If you can manage smaller DOF (e.g. all shots at infinity, many shots in a church, but few shots in a dining room), you can really see an improvement with FF. E.g. if you're shooting outside, it's pretty easy to find an inexpensive 50mm F/1.4, but a 31mm F/1.8 is expensive, and on APS-C is over two stops slower.

Doesn't really count, but once I shot, handheld, a 14mm F/2.8 on FF, about an hour after official sunset. Looked pretty good to me, at least; for that one corner case.

---------- Post added 03-08-15 at 06:13 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by JimmyDranox Quote
Yes. At different iSO sony at 6400, and Pentax k-3 at 3200, the difference in noise is not so big. But still, The FF semms to have a bbetter resolution that APS-C, even if they are both 24Mp.
Impossible. APS-C is way better. The lenses are so much cuter.
03-08-2015, 10:29 PM - 1 Like   #44
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,614
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The parameters I defined were 100 to 400 ISO, so I'm not sure why you keep going on about the 6400 ISO thing. It's unacceptable both cameras, in most circumstances 1600 ISO is un-acceptable in a Pentax. Why do you guys keep trying to impress me with stuff, I've already told you is unacceptable? ou do understand that tho matter what system you use, buy 6400 ISO you've lost 4 stops of Dynamic range, on anything accept maybe a Sony A7s which has unacceptably low dynamic range to start with?
Because the member who started this thread want to make photos at weddings. And sometime (manytimes) at weddings low light performance is needed. And blinding the participants with the flash is not desirable.
03-08-2015, 11:53 PM - 1 Like   #45
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And then if you match DoF you can shoot at wider ƒstop with APS-c, one stop faster ISO and completely negate the FF advantage.
So if I change the ISO on my APS-C body, the 2nd SD slot on my FF body will disappear, it's OVF will dim and shrink, and the AoV/DoF optical ratio will change?

Yes, I'm being a jerk.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, a7r, aps-c, dof, e.g, ff, full-frame, iso, iso100, k-3, k-5, k3, lenses, light, month, noise, pentax, post, sensor, shooter, shot, shots, sony, technology, wedding
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much would you pay for the FF body only? VoiceOfReason Pentax Full Frame 111 08-16-2015 11:59 PM
Would you buy the first FF if it is a K-01 or wait for the FF DSLR? slackercruster Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-18-2012 10:09 PM
Can't Wait For Summer Venturi Post Your Photos! 7 04-26-2009 02:38 PM
Can't wait till Canon Announces New FF Cam Okami Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 2 09-15-2008 05:45 AM
Can't wait for Spring! kpfeifle Post Your Photos! 4 03-01-2008 10:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:10 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top